testata inforMARE
3. Juni 2023 - Jahr XXVII
Unabhängige Zeitung zu Wirtschaft und Verkehrspolitik
13:30 GMT+2
LinnkedInTwitterFacebook
FORUM über Shipping
und Logistik


The Review of the First Railway Package

Joint Position Paper of the

European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO)

and the

European Federation of Inland Ports (EFIP)


18 May 2011

Seaports and inland ports are faced with the same challenges and the same problems when it comes to railways and the policy governing it. Therefore, the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) and the European Federation of Inland Ports (EFIP) have prepared a joint position paper on EU railway policy in general and the proposals for the recast of the First Railway Package in particular.



Table of contents

Executive summary
1. The relation between ports, port authorities and railways
2. Concerns about the current functioning of European railways
3. ESPO-EFIP views on EU railway policy and the recast proposal
References



Executive summary

The Single European Railway Area - no more time to lose!

For ports, there is a clear sense of urgency in achieving a single European railway network. A single European railway area without barriers seems to be the best way to guarantee an efficient use of the existing railway capacity. The remaining barriers, both legal, technical and political, should be lifted without further delay.

This is the main message that European seaports and inland ports want to send to European policy makers, now that the proposal to review the first railway package, the so-called “recast-proposal”, is high on the political agenda of both the European Parliament and the Council. The European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) and the European Federation of Inland ports (EFIP) fully support the recast proposal of the Commission. They even want to go a step further.

The main challenges and concerns European seaports and inland ports are facing today regarding the functioning of the European railways are:

  • Today, rail still has a national approach.
  • The investments in rail freight infrastructure are not always demand driven.
  • The incumbent undertaking often still enjoys a preferential treatment in receiving slot access to the network and good timetables at the dispatching centres of the infrastructure manager.
  • The European railway system consists of a patchwork of different track pricing regimes. Track pricing is not always transparent and fair.
  • There is a low level of reliability for non prescheduled rail freight trains (ad hoc slots).
  • The “last rail miles” linking the rail terminal outside the port area with the port area are often characterised by old infrastructure and bad equipment.
  • Spatial as well as local environmental effects (noise, vibrations…) are often difficult issues for local authorities and citizens.
  • Rail has problems to meet the demand for short distance journeys (<100 km). The lack of flexibility when using rail freight services plays a role here.
  • There is a lack of statistical information on rail cargo, their destinations and volumes.

Based on these concerns, ESPO and EFIP have developed the following recommendations:

  • The current EU legislative framework on railways should be simplified.
  • A real European approach will avoid diverging interpretations by Member States and limit the risk of having new barriers.
  • The rail links to and from the port area should be optimised in view of guaranteeing a non discriminatory access for all railway undertakings to the port area. Improving these links should be seen as an important element of completion of the TEN-T network.
  • Awaiting a full European interoperable railway system, a pragmatic regime of cross acceptance of operational rules at local level is needed to enhance the railway links between cross border ports in the short run.
  • The corridor approach should not replace “national barriers” with “corridor barriers”. The corridor approach should be considered as a step towards a genuine European policy and railway network.

As regards the recast proposal of the European Commission, ESPO-EFIP ask for:

  • The full unbundling of railway infrastructure and operations.
  • A transparent role of the infrastructure manager.
  • A railway strategy based on a genuine European approach.
  • A non discriminatory access to rail related services in the port.
  • A transparent charging system for using railway infrastructure.
  • There should be no higher charges (“mark ups”) for international railway services than for domestic services.


1. The relation between ports, port authorities and railways

Before addressing the current EU railway policy and the EC proposals on the table, it is important to define from which angle ports should be looking at European railways and to determine why railway policy is important for both sea and inland ports and their authorities.

Looking at railway services and ports one should first make the distinction between port infrastructure and operations in the port area and port infrastructure and operations outside the port area.

Different models exist for the development, management and operation of the railway system inside the port area. Even if there seems to be a tendency for port authorities to become owner of the railway infrastructure in the port, there is no agreement on what model should be favored.

It is however clear that railway undertakings operating on the national and European railway network should have track access to the port area. The connection between the European rail network and the port should be open to all railway undertakings wanting to enter the port. Moreover, rail related services in the port, such as shunting infrastructure, fuelling and servicing, … should be open to all rail undertakings in a non discriminatory manner.

But Europe’s railway policy concerns in the first place the railway system outside the port area.

Both for seaports and inland ports, the existence of adequate rail links between the port and the hinterland and the efficient use of this railway infrastructure, linking the port with the hinterland, are of paramount importance.

From a seaport point of view, efficient and sustainable hinterland connections are increasingly important. With transport volumes rising gradually in European seaports, it is clear that sustainable solutions have to be found to transport these freight flows to the hinterland. Moreover, often the development of additional capacity in a seaport will only get an approval if some strong engagements as regards sustainable hinterland flows are made. Indeed, as mentioned in a recent analysis ITMMA made for ESPO (i), the configuration (of barge and) railway networks proves to be a crucial organisational element for the future spatial hierarchy in the European port system.

But there is more. To face the growth rates in container handling, seaports are also increasingly looking beyond their own infrastructure and facilities and liaise with intermodal inland terminals in their hinterland. Inland ports and terminals allow for de/re-consolidation of cargo flows, and can help seaports to fully exploit potential economies of scale. Here again, performing railway links are, together with inland waterway links, a decisive factor.

From an inland port point of view, a well functioning and efficient railway infrastructure is fundamental. Inland ports are a lot more than entrance and exit gates on the waterway. Inland ports are important nodes in the inland transport network. Their success depends on their efficient water and railway transport links with the seaports and with the different economic centres. For inland ports situated along waterways, which do not have a guaranteed navigability all year round, railways are even more important.

At the same time, seaports and inland ports can be considered as very important “feeders” of rail freight trains and their lines in the European Union. Sea port related traffic, as part of the overall European traffic mix, constitutes a significant volume. WORLDNET estimated that some 603bn inland tonne kilometres are generated annually within the EU territory from seaborne freight, about a quarter of total freight. Looking at rail freight, 26% of rail freight traffic in the European Union is port related (ii).



2. Concerns about the current functioning of European railways

2.1. Rail still has a national approach

Today, rail still has a national approach. The cross border problems and lack of interoperability between the different railway systems are a major concern, clearly hampering the smooth functioning of the railway market and a fluid cargo flow by rail from the ports to the hinterland. A harmonisation of the rail gauges seems in that respect a priority. Other existing constraints in border crossing relate to differences in traction energy, train length, train controlling systems, rolling stock, operational rules, train crew certification, etc. But the need for cooperation goes beyond the development of Technical Specification for Interoperability (TSI). Infrastructure managers should also better cooperate in exchanging cross-border information.

Moreover, European railway corridors do not stop at EU borders. As a consequence, European railway policy should not only aim for an EU approach but also for a common approach that goes beyond these borders.

2.2. Investments in rail freight infrastructure are not always demand driven

The investments in rail infrastructure should be targeted and balanced. The incumbent railway undertaking (the former national railway company) remains often the most important interlocutor. Newcomers nor port authorities are sufficiently involved in the planning of investments in railway infrastructure.

In addition, it is important that the quality of infrastructure and tracks relate to the demands of the market and the function they have to fulfill, avoiding overinvestment and obliging users to pay for a quality that they do not need.

2.3. Preferential treatment of the incumbent railway undertaking can lead to market distortions

Often the incumbent undertaking still enjoys preferential treatment in receiving slot access to the network and good timetables at the dispatching centres of the infrastructure manager. In some cases, the incumbent undertaking has a special access to the information database of the infrastructure manager. This access provides him with valuable (sensitive) commercial information which gives him a competitive advantage over other parties who do not have this “inside” information. This preferential treatment is due to the fact that the incumbent rail undertaking often has staff (e.g. to manage the interface ‘track/slot allocation, rolling stock-fleet and undertaking-staff) in this dispatching centre.

2.4. Lack of statistical information

There is a lack of statistical information on rail cargo, their destinations and volumes. The liberalisation of the rail freight market has implied that available information became fragmented, since cargo and wagons are in hands of different parties. This calls for a stronger role of the infrastructure manager to ensure data availability and exchange.

2.5. Track pricing is not always transparent and fair

The European railway system consists of a patchwork of different track pricing regimes. Furthermore the track price is not always related to the quality of the path or the service. The price of a train path should be related to its use (e.g. passenger or freight) and to the quality of the services offered and used.

2.6. A low level of reliability for non prescheduled rail freight trains

Reliability of rail freight transport proves to be a problem for ad hoc slots: these are freight trains that are not regular, not integrated in a dedicated time slot. This is especially the case for inland ports and terminals, which very often rely on many different infrastructure managers and experience more difficulties since they are further located in the chain.

2.7. Local environmental complaints in urban areas

Logistic and spatial planning problems can arise when linking ports and urban areas through railways. Using rail to link long distance transport with the last urban mile implies sufficient consolidation, distribution and logistics space in or near urban areas. Spatial as well as local environmental effects (noise,…) are often difficult issues for local authorities and citizens. Moreover, given the fact that rail freight has to share the infrastructure with passenger traffic, it is clear that rail freight often crosses urban areas in transit. Increasingly, this leads to local environmental problems (noise, vibrations,…). This is also due to the fact that housing is authorised very near to train tracks. The transport of dangerous goods can give rise to additional problems in that respect.

2.8. Problems to meet the demand for short distance journeys (<100 km)

The transport from and to the port is not always a long distance transport. The big challenge for rail freight is to attract the important market segment of the shorter freight journeys. Up to now, rail seems not ready to fulfill this function. The lack of flexibility when using rail freight services plays a role here. Often, train paths for rail shuttles have to be reserved one year in advance. Here inland waterway transport and road are far more flexible.

2.9. Limited infrastructure and access for the “last mile” by rail

The last rail miles linking the rail terminal outside the port area with the port area are often characterised by old infrastructure and bad equipment. Sometimes the tracks are not electrified, which means that the link with the port area can only be made with diesel locomotives. The limited infrastructure makes the rail operations on these last miles very complicated (burdensome security rules,…) and restricts indirectly the access to the port area. Often rail undertakings are not willing or not able to access ports and have to rely on the unique railway undertaking bridging the rail terminal with the port area (“opérateur ferroviaire de proximité”). The lack of competition in this part of the network has an effect on the price.

To conclude, port authorities are convinced that railways have to be taken out of their isolation. Rail performance can be improved by going outside the ‘comfort zone’: all parties (also private undertakings, shippers,…) should be involved and close cooperation between sea ports and inland ports should be encouraged. This cooperation should also be sought cross-border through a better exchange of information. Ports should not only look in their own backyard, but should oversee their entire supply chain and act proactively on both bottlenecks and opportunities.



3. ESPO-EFIP views on EU railway policy and the recast proposal

3.1. Introduction: the Single European Railway Area - no more time to lose!

For ports, there is a clear sense of urgency in achieving a single European railway network. A single European railway area without barriers seems to be the best way to guarantee an efficient use of the existing railway capacity. The remaining barriers, both legal, technical and political, should be lifted without further delay. Therefore, ESPO and EFIP fully subscribe to the aims of this recast.

In a co-modal transport chain, each transport mode has to follow pace. The strength of a transport chain is determined by the strength of its weakest part. ESPO and EFIP strongly believe that green logistics is not possible without a dynamic railway sector.

Bearing in mind the huge investments needed to develop railway infrastructure in Europe, ESPO and EFIP consider that existing railway infrastructure has to be used as efficient and sustainable as possible. Each barrier implies an additional delay. New infrastructure should be developed as targeted as possible taking into account the needs of European transport users and market demands.

ESPO and EFIP underline the importance of optimising rail links to and from the port area in view of guaranteeing a non-discriminatory access for all railway undertakings to the port area. Improving and modernising the link between ports and railway networks should be seen as an important element to complete the TEN-T network.

ESPO and EFIP particularly favours the attempts to simplify the current EU legislative framework on railways. The recast should aim at a real European approach, avoiding diverging interpretations by Member States. As such, the risk of having new barriers to a fully European market will be limited.

European ports urge the European Commission to step up its efforts to monitor the implementation of the European regulatory framework. It is useless to have a European Railway Area on paper, if the majority of governments and stakeholders are not respecting the rules. Market failures and distortions should be addressed promptly.

Awaiting a full European interoperable railway system, European ports ask for pragmatic solutions in local cross-border zones. In that respect ESPO and EFIP plead for a pragmatic regime of cross acceptance of operational rules at local level, to enhance the railway links between cross-border ports in the short run. These short term solutions at local level should not jeopardise the overall aim of achieving a full interoperable railway system.

Finally, ESPO and EFIP point out that the corridor approach should not replace “national barriers” with “corridor barriers”. The corridor approach should be considered as a step towards a genuine European policy and railway network. The corridors should learn from each other and exchange (best) practices, instead of competing with each other. The relation between the different corridor-oriented initiatives at EU level (ERTMS, rail freight, …) should be clarified and their implementation should be coordinated.

3.2. Full unbundling railway infrastructure and operations (Article 4 and 7)

ESPO and EFIP plead for a complete unbundling of railway infrastructure and operations. The infrastructure manager should be completely independent from rail operations. The separation of infrastructure management and railway operations that is currently foreseen “on paper” does not guarantee a full separation in reality. The current provisions still allow for situations where the infrastructure manager remains hostage of the rail operation branch of the incumbent railway undertaking. This could lead to infrastructure investment choices that are biased by the interests of the incumbent undertaking and could hamper an optimal organisation, use and management of rail infrastructure. Therefore ESPO and EFIP back the proposal for a full unbundling of infrastructure and operations. The unbundling should thus also be “legal”: infrastructure managers and rail operations services cannot be housed under the same mother company or holding. Only a fully independent infrastructure manager can play its role properly.

3.3. The role of the infrastructure manager should be transparent (Article 7 and annex II)

ESPO and EFIP welcome the proposal to work towards a harmonised list of “essential functions” of infrastructure managers. This will enhance the transparency of their role and make it easier for applicants of train paths to deal with the different infrastructure managers.

Moreover, infrastructure managers should avoid taking decisions that are in conflict with Europe’s Infrastructure Policy. It is clear though that the role of the infrastructure manager goes beyond the management of the TEN-T railway infrastructure. Infrastructure managers are also in charge of managing the regional and local network. It is important however that both levels of infrastructure management are reinforcing - and not contradicting - each other.

3.4. Need for a genuine European railway strategy (Article 8)

In view of achieving a single European railway network, ESPO and EFIP fully support the idea of a medium and long term infrastructure strategy to be developed by Member States, allowing the market and potential investors to make the necessary choices. However, when developing this strategy a clear distinction should be made between rail passengers and rail freight transport. Moreover, a the development of the strategy should follow a genuine European approach. ESPO and EFIP believe it should be stated more explicitly in the text of the proposal that this strategy should be based on the Union’s infrastructure policy, avoiding as such that 27 national strategies are being developed. A clear reference to Europe’s infrastructure policy seems relevant in that respect. It is then for Member States to elaborate it, taking into account specific national circumstances. Finally, it is important to involve port authorities, applicants and potential applicants of the railway infrastructure proactively in this exercise.

Finally, the five-year duration of the agreement between competent authorities of Member States and infrastructure managers (article 30, paragraph 2), which provides for State funding, should be seen as an absolute minimum, in order to guarantee continuity of investment.

3.5. Rail related services: the scope needs clarification (Article 10, 13 and Annex III)

ESPO and EFIP support the Commission proposals on rail related services. Rail related services in ports, such as shunting and marshalling yards, fuelling, maintenance, storage sidings, servicing, … should indeed be equally open to all rail undertakings. The “use-or-lose-it” principle, as put forward in the Commission proposal, can be an interesting instrument to guarantee an optimal use of rail related services. A conflict of interest may rise when one of these rail related services is in the hands or under control of the incumbent undertaking. This can affect newcomers who are disadvantaged through higher prices, less access or less service. It remains however to be seen what the modalities of such a principle should be.

ESPO and EFIP request however a clarification as regards the scope of the rail related services. Looking at freight terminals, a distinction should be made between “on dock terminals” (seaside or waterborne terminals) and “off dock terminals” (hub terminals). Whereas the access to on-dock rails should not be limited to one rail undertaking, ESPO and EFIP believe that dedicated rail tracks on the on-dock terminals, which are only used by the undertaking of the on-dock terminal, should be excluded from the scope of the provisions on rail related services. It seems logical that a privately owned railway infrastructure is only used for transporting freight that arrived by ship at this terminal. Neighbouring terminals should only have access to this terminal and its rail tracks if the on-dock terminal operator agrees. “Public” on-dock terminals which are used by different companies for loading and unloading ships should not be excluded from the provisions of this directive. The railway infrastructure on these terminals should be open for all users.

3.6. Charging of railway infrastructure must be transparent and fair

ESPO and EFIP plead for a transparent charging system for using railway infrastructure. The setting of charges for the use of infrastructure should guarantee a level playing field between different Member States, different ports, different applicants of railway infrastructure. European ports mainly operate on an international basis. An increased coordination between infrastructure managers when it comes to establishing charges for the use of infrastructure is therefore considered a priority.

In this respect, ports are responding positively to the initiative of the Commission to identify on the basis of objective criteria different market segments that allow for a different level of charges.

But looking at the different market segments identified in the recast proposal, European ports believe it is against every market logic to allow for a higher charge (“mark up”) for international services than for domestic services. In view of guaranteeing a level playing field between Member States, one should avoid that different charges for different market segments lead to market distortions. A higher charge for international services could have adverse effects in terms of achieving a Single European Railway Area by making domestic rail freight journeys cheaper. In an open European market, international rail freight journeys shouldn’t be more costly for infrastructure managers than domestic journeys. Besides, by making international journeys more expensive, one could indirectly make the call on domestic ports cheaper than the use of ports in neighbouring countries. On the other hand, ports of small Member States would be disadvantaged if crossing a national barrier can give rise to a higher charge. ESPO and EFIP therefore oppose the differentiation between domestic and international services for the setting of the charges.

European ports acknowledge that infrastructure managers of different Member States have to cooperate when introducing mark-ups that relate to rail services on more than one network (article 37). However, international and domestic charges should not be treated differently in a fully open EU rail market.

3.7. A balanced market monitoring

ESPO and EFIP back the Commission proposals regarding market monitoring. Market imbalances and distortions of competition should be detected as soon as possible. A strict monitoring system of the quality of rail transport infrastructure and of infrastructure charging seems appropriate in that respect. The question is whether Member States are able to assess prices and quality of railway services as foreseen in the recast proposal.



References

i

Institute of Transport and Maritime Management Antwerp and European Sea Ports Organisation (2009), Economic Analysis of the European Seaport System, ITMMA/ESPO, Antwerp/Brussels.


http://www.espo.be/images/stories/
Publications/studies_reports_surveys/
ITMMAEconomicAnalysisoftheEuropeanPortSystem2009.pdf



ii

NEA (2010), Ports and Their Connections Within the TEN-T, NEA, Zoetermeer.


http://ec.europa.eu/transport/infrastructure/
studies/doc/2010_12_ports_and_their
_connections_within_the_ten-t.pdf



For more information, please contact:

Isabelle Ryckbost
Director
European Federation of Inland Ports (EFIP)
Tel + 32 2 219 82 07
Email: isabelle.ryckbost@inlandports.be
Patrick Verhoeven
Secretary General
European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO)
Tel + 32 2 736 34 63
Email: patrick.verhoeven@espo.be

ESPO - EFIP
Treurenberg 6
B-1000 Brussel / Bruxelles
www.espo.be - www.inlandports.eu

›››Archiv
AB DER ERSTE SEITE
Erneuerung der Konzession für PSA Venice
Venedig
Sie wird eine Laufzeit von 25 Jahren haben. Investitionsinvestitionen in Höhe von 78,6 Mio. EUR und ein Wachstum des Verkehrsaufkommens bis zu 500000 000 EUR. Konzession in Veneta Cement
Bei der Dekarbonisierung darf das Shipping nicht übermäßig auf das e-fuel-Rückgriff gehen.
Bei der Dekarbonisierung darf das Shipping nicht übermäßig auf das e-fuel-Rückgriff gehen.
Kopenhagen
Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping warnt die Berücksichtigung der Verfügbarkeit und der künftigen Preise der Biokraftstoff-Elektrobrennstoffe.
Die EU-Kommission legt fünf Legislativvorschläge für die Sicherheit im Seeverkehr und die Verhütung der Meeresverschmutzung durch Schiffe vor.
Brüssel
Das Ziel besteht auch darin, die europäischen Normen an die internationalen Regelungen anzugleichen.
Ein Viertel der russischen Unternehmen läuft Gefahr, die Produktion wegen der Schwierigkeiten, Waren aus dem Ausland zu beziehen, zu stoppen.
Moskau
Der erste stellvertretende Vorsitzende des Zentrums für strategische Forschung in Moskau, sagte dies.
Die Spediteure melden die Blockade der Maßnahmen zur Verbesserung der Betriebsfähigkeit der Lastkraftwagen im Hafen von Spice.
La Spezia
Vielleicht-die Kategorieverbänden-ist der Wille, den Status quo aufrechtzuerhalten.
L'ultima lettura del Goods Trade Barometer della WTO segnala una ripresa che però potrebbe essere assai accidentata
Der jüngste Stand des WTO-Warenhandelsbarometers signalisiert eine Erholung, die jedoch sehr holprig sein könnte
Genf
Positive Signale von Exportaufträgen
L'ultimo rapporto di AGCS evidenzia la notevole diminuzione della perdita totale di navi
Der jüngste GATS-Bericht zeigt den deutlichen Rückgang der Gesamtverluste an Schiffen
Johannesburg/London/Madrid/München/New York/Paris/Rotterdam/Singapur
Im Jahr 2022 ging die Zahl um -36 % zurück
.
Sinken, Brand/Explosion und Kollision sind die häufigsten Unfallursachen
Hafen von Livorno, zwischen vier Geschäftsleuten und drei Unternehmen
Livorno
Folge von mehr als 80000 Euro an einen Beamten der Hafendienstberechtigung
L'elvetica Accelleron ha acquisito Officine Meccaniche Torino
Das Schweizer Unternehmen Accelleron hat Officine Meccaniche Torino übernommen
Baden
Das Unternehmen aus Rivoli ist ein führender Hersteller von Einspritzsystemen für Schiffsmotoren
Grimaldi bestellt zwei weitere neue 9.000 cu Pure Car & Truck Carrier Schiffe
Neapel/Rom
Grimaldi Euromed bestätigt die Kontinuität des Seegebiets auf der Strecke Civitavecchia - Arbatax - Cagliari
Le Aziende informano
La Ant. Bellettieri & Co., presente da più di 140 anni nel Porto di Civitavecchia, opera nella logistica portuale e nell'intermodalità mare, ferro, gomma
Zustimmung der Europäischen Kommission zur Refinanzierung des italienischen Marebonus
Brüssel
Beihilfeprogramm in Höhe von 125 Mio. EUR mit einer Laufzeit bis 2027 genehmigt
Assarmatori, gute EU-Genehmigung der italienischen Beihilfe für die Intermodalität Straße-See
Rom
Messina; jetzt geht es darum, die Ressourcen so schnell wie möglich zu nutzen
I porti cinesi stabiliscono un nuovo record storico di traffico quadrimestrale delle merci
Chinesische Häfen stellen neuen Vier-Monats-Rekord im Frachtverkehr auf
Peking
Neuer Höchststand allein bei den Containern
A metà giugno Blue Dream Cruises riattiverà la crociere internazionali dalla Cina sospese per più di tre anni
Mitte Juni werden Blue Dream Cruises die internationalen Kreuzfahrten aus China für mehr als drei Jahre ausgesetzt reagieren
Shanghai
Ich bin Shanghai und Shenzhen die Pilothäfen, die von der Peking Regierung für die Wiederaufnahme der Aktivität gewählt
Bennett (ICS): per decarbonizzare lo shipping è necessario fissare una chiara direzione e fornire i mezzi per raggiungere la destinazione
Bennett (ICS): Zur Dekarbonisierung des Versandes ist es notwendig, eine klare Richtung zu fixieren und die Mittel zur Erreichung des Ziels bereitzustellen
Nel primo trimestre i ricavi della CMA CGM sono diminuiti del -30,2%
Im ersten Quartal sind die Einnahmen von CMA CGM von -30,2% verringert
Marseille
Der Umsatz des Versandsegments wird von -40,3% gesunken. -72,1% des Nettogewinns
Livorno, Kampagne zur Überwachung der Luftqualität in den benachbarten Gebieten der Hafengebiete
Livorno
Die Erkennungskampagne dauert 240 Tage.
Vereinbarung von Fincantieri in Kanada zur Vorlage des Patrouillers "Vigilance" für die Royal Canadian Navy
Triest
Zwei Initiativen zum Gedenken an Giuseppe Bono
Am 30. Juni findet in Genua die zweite Ausgabe des YoWoler-Shipping-Party-Party-Shipping-Party statt.
Genua
Das Ereignis wird von Assagenten umgestuft.
Fincantieri baut das dritte Navy-U-Boot der italienischen Marine Italienisch.
Triest
Die ersten beiden Schläge werden 2027 und 2029 ausgeliefert.
ABB plant eine Wale-Warteschlange für den Antrieb kleiner und mittlerer Schiffe.
ABB plant eine Wale-Warteschlange für den Antrieb kleiner und mittlerer Schiffe.
Zürich
Der erste Prototyp steht im Jahr 2025 zur Verfügung.
Freie Verbindung zwischen dem Hafen von Ancona und dem Bundesstraßenstraße 16
Ancona
Acquaroli: Dies ist ein wesentliches Werk für die Entwicklung des Hafens, der Ancona und der Markennees.
NÄCHSTE ABFAHRSTERMINE
Visual Sailing List
Abfahrt
Ankunft:
- Alphabetische Liste
- Nationen
- Geographische Lage
CMA CGM hat die Übernahme von La Méridionale abgeschlossen
Marseille
Nächste Bestellung für zwei neue LNG-Schiffe angekündigt
Bootsmesse in Venedig eingeweiht
Venedig
Über 220 Aussteller. 300 Boote präsentiert, davon 240 im Wasser
MSC Crociere ha preso in consegna la nuova MSC Euribia
MSC Kreuzfahrten in der Lieferung die neue MSC Euribia
Saint-Nazaire
In der Werft von Chantiers de l'Atlantique fand auch die Münzzeremonie von "MSC World America" statt
Abkommen zwischen dem AdSP der Zentraladria und der regionalen Agentur der Marken für den Umweltschutz
Yang Ming bestellt HHI den Bau von fünf portacontainer von 15.500 teu
Keule
Verpflichtung im Wert von 927.9 Mio. $
Hafen von Genua, Verringerung von Verfahrensfehlern beim Papierkram um 70
Genua
dies ist das Ergebnis eines Kurses, der von der Hafenmeisterei und Assagenti organisiert wurde
Confitarma äußert sich zufrieden über die EU-Bewilligung zur Förderung der Intermodalität Straße-See, beklagt aber fehlende Mittel
Rom
Mattioli: Wir hoffen, dass die neue Regierung im Hinblick auf das nächste Haushaltsgesetz eine konkrete Diskussion mit der Rüstungsindustrie zu diesem Thema aufnehmen wird
KHI und DNV werden eine Methode zur Berechnung der CO2-Emissionen der Flüssigwasserstoff-Lieferkette entwickeln
Tokio
Unterzeichnung einer besonderen Absichtserklärung
Der spanische FENADISMER wird eine neue Klasse gegen Ölunternehmen starten
Madrid
Sie werden beschuldigt, die Auswirkungen des Konflikts in Udrain zu nutzen, um einen Zuschlag auf Kraftstoffe anzuwenden
Eni-Abkommen - RINA für die Energiewende und Dekarbonisierung des Seeverkehrs
Rom/Genua
Unter den Zwecken, die Entwicklung...
Chinesische Investitionen in die Wirtschaftszone Suez Canal
Peking
Produktionsaktivitäten werden installiert
Im erst Quartal von diesem Jahr hat der Verkehr von den Waren in den kroatischen Häfen von +14,9% gewachsen
Zagreb
Die Erhöhung wird durch den Anstieg der Schüttvolumen bestimmt
Veranstaltung in Genua für die Wiederbelebung der Wirtschaft des Meeres
Genua
Der Sektor wurde in den letzten Jahrzehnten in seinem Potenzial dramatisch unterschätzt.
Assiterminal, Assologistica und Fise-Uniport-Übereinkommen zur Sicherheit am Arbeitsplatz
Genua
Es ist per definitionem mit der Unterstützung von RINA
CMA CGM compra il quotidiano economico francese “La Tribune”
CMA CGM kauft die französische Wirtschaftszeit "La Tribune"
Marseille
Das Unternehmen ist bereits aktiv in der Publikation mit den Zeitungen "La Provence" und "Corse Matin"
Nächster Monat Metrans aktiviert einen intermodalen Link Rijeka-Budapest
Prag
Das Terminal der ungarischen Hauptstadt wird mit dem Serb Terminal von Indija verbunden
Ok zu einem Beitrag von 2,2 Millionen für die genoese hafen Firma CULMV
Genua
Beschluss des Verwaltungsausschusses
ITA Airways bestätigte die Vereinbarung mit Lufthansa
Rom
Uilt, wichtig jetzt, um die Ziele der Entwicklung und des Wachstums des Industrieplans zu verwirklichen
Deutsch Schües ist neuer Präsident des BIMCO
Kopenhagen
Subentra zu Sabrina Chao, der seinen zweijährigen Termin geschlossen hat
PSA hat einen Minderheitsanteil im vietnamesischen Logistikunternehmen Sotrans erworben
Singapur
Es wurde von Indo Trans Logistics Corporation
Einweihung der zweiten Phase des vietnamesischen Containerterminals von Nam Dinh Vu (Haipong)
Sie haben Phong
Es hat eine jährliche Kapazitätspaare zu 1,2 million von teu
Im April wird der Verkehr von den Waren im Hafen von Barcelona von -7.8% gesunken
Barcelona
Die Abnahme wurde durch die Abnahme des Behälters, insbesondere durch die beim Transport
TIL ordnet ZPMC neun Kaienkrane für den TPO/TNMSC-Terminal des Hafens von Le Havre an
Le Havre
Schiffe können von 24.000 teu bedient werden.
GNV erweitert seine Unterstützung für das Projekt zum Schutz der Schildkröten und der Wale im Mittelmeer.
Genua
Neben der Strecke Neapel-Palermo werden Forscher an Bord von Schiffen, die auf den Trakten Barcelona-Tanger und Valencia-Palma eingesetzt werden, an Bord mitgeführt.
Das erste Quartal von MPC Container Ships ist positiv.
Oslo
Das norwegische Unternehmen befürchtet, dass das Wachstum des Angebots im Segment der großen Containerschiffe auch Auswirkungen auf die Flotten auf intra-regionaler Strecken haben könnte.
UniCredit finanziert die ersten beiden Investitionen im ZES-Bereich des Nola-Zins.
Rom
Von der Bank wurden insgesamt 17 Millionen für Temi Spa und die Gruppe Pharvima Medicinali gewährt.
Abkommen PSA-Kasachstan Railways für die Entwicklung des transkaspischen Korridors
Singapur/Astana
Er wurde heute bei Kasachstan-Singapur Business Forum paraphiert.
Im April ist der Verkehr im Hafen von Valencia um -14,2% gesunken.
Valencia
Im ersten Vierteljahr 2023 betrug der Rückgang 9,6%.
Intercargo macht 32% der Kapazität der Weltflotte für Rhintner aus.
Dubai
Der Verband macht mehr als 3.200 Bulk-Karrier
Bestellung von 313 Millionen Dollar an Hyundai Mipo Dockyard für fünf neue Containerschiffe
Ulsan
Sie werden bis zum ersten Halbjahr 2026 geliefert.
HÄFEN
Italienische Häfen:
Ancona Genua Ravenna
Augusta Gioia Tauro Salerno
Bari La Spezia Savona
Brindisi Livorno Taranto
Cagliari Neapel Trapani
Carrara Palermo Triest
Civitavecchia Piombino Venedig
Italienische Logistik-zentren: Liste Häfen der Welt: Landkarte
DATEN-BANK
ReedereienWerften
SpediteureSchiffs-ausrüster
agenturenGüterkraft-verkehrs-unternehmer
MEETINGS
Am 25. Mai findet in Genua ein Auswahlverfahren für die Planung, den Betrieb und die Verwaltung von Verkehrsnetzen statt.
Genua
Er wird vom Internationalen Institut für Kommunikation und vom ZIFI veranstaltet.
Am 26. Mai findet in Genua das erste Gen Global Forum statt.
Genua
Er wird vom strategischen Beratungszentrum "Giuseppe Bono" organisiert.
››› Archiv
NACHRICHTENÜBERBLICK INHALTSVERZEICHNIS
Exclusive: Malaysian tycoon weighs selling a stake in $2.7 bln port business -sources
(Reuters)
Malaysia's Ekuiti Nasional Explores Sale of Shipping Unit Orkim, Sources Say
(Bloomberg)
››› Nachrichtenüberblick Archiv
FORUM über Shipping
und Logistik
Relazione del presidente Daniele Rossi
Napoli, 30 settembre 2020
››› Archiv
- Via Raffaele Paolucci 17r/19r - 16129 Genua - ITALIEN
tel.: +39.010.2462122, fax: +39.010.2516768, e-mail
Umsatzsteuernummer: 03532950106
Registrazione Stampa 33/96 Tribunale di Genova
Verantwortlicher Direktor: Bruno Bellio
Jede Reproduktion, ohne die ausdrückliche Erlaubnis des Herausgebers, ist verboten
Suche in inforMARE Einführung
Feed RSS Werbeflächen

inforMARE in Pdf
Handy